Why to be a Buzzkill!!! My opinion of the Df has changed...

[TheLost]

I'm pretty sure they were marketing it to EXACTLY people who have at least one DSLR already, or at least some expensive piece of photo kit, possibly multiple, and who want.. something else. Gear enthusiasts who fancy themselves Serious Photographers. Film People who haven't yet made the switch to digital because they love their film gear. D4 owners who want a cheaper second body. Older guys getting sick of dragging medium/large format gear around.

... or people like me who cant wait to put it on an sweet leather strap and hike the hills of Scotland in my wool coat... MAN I'M GONG TO LOOK FREAKING AWESOME!!

I am only 1/2 joking. I love the layout and the dials... i will be at my local camera shop the day this thing comes out and give it a good tickle.

 

[Derrel]

Well the people writing this stuff, lets face it, they are camera geeks. Like me. Like you. They have a wishlist of items they wanted to see in the next Nikon release, and they are a little cheesed off that Nikon didn't build the camera specifically for them. They just aren't getting the concept that the Df is not marketed towards them. Or if they are getting that concept it's just hacking them off even more I guess... lol..

Somewhere I have a picture of my kid bawling his eyes out...I need to find it and make a meme out of it for the Fro Knows Photo crowd...title it, "Why you cryin' like a little baby?" and then at the bottom, it needs to say, "Nikon didn't make the camera I WANTED 'EM TO MAKE!!!"

Yeah...I've seen this before...Whenever anything "new" comes out, there's always a slew of detractors telling whomever will listen how awful the new thing is going to be. I can name off a few...Ford Taurus, Netflicks, Comedy Central, the iPod, iMac, iPhone...all of those were utter crap when they were introduced. At least according to the old folks at home!

I remember how vitriolic people were when Apple introduced the curvy, bondi blue colored iMac back in the late 1990's...Satan in a Computer, right? I remember when Apple said, "Hey--we're gonna sell music as downloads!" The HORROR!!! How would people stack their CD cases in bookshelves to show off their massive peni...err...their massive collections of music on CD!

I remember when the first version of Microsoft Windows OS hit the market. The DOS-based clown suit was soundly dissed by so,so,so many. They KNEW that DOS and the command line interface were better than a mouse and those infernal....Windows! LOL.

 

[cgw]

I admit it, I still read Thom Hogan's articles pretty regularly, and I also read his first impressions of the Nikon Df piece yesterday. Although I do respect his experience very much, and admire the work he does, I think his judgement has begun to slip and become questionable over the last year or so. I myself used to be in camera and video camera sales for a small chain that had 13 camera stores. I've literally SOLD cameras, face to face, across a sales counter, and I was damned good at it too. I can tell you one thing...if I were still in the biz, the Df would be EASY to sell to qualified customers. Of multiple age demographics, and from multiple levels of experience.

I have not read the counter-article to Hogan's piece, but yesterday, as I read Hogan's list of complaints and fantasy suggestions, I thought to myself...."Wow..he really doesn't 'get it' any longer," and "He loves to second-guess the world's second-biggest camera maker, constantly." Since he has become more involved in the mirrorless camera issue, and has begun his new sansmirror website, his ideas about how a camera ought to be designed,and how it ought to work, seems to have become muddled and confused, mixing and matching d-slr with compact mirrorless buyers and users, and making sweeping, blanket assumptions that really don't seem to apply to all shooters, as well as trying to make weak arguments.

Case in point: he began the article by setting up a THREE-option scenario for how a camera pre-introduction can be perceived by the public. Unfortunately, life is not so simple as to have only "three" types of scenarios.

I like the retro look of the Df, and think it has some unique features. I have not made my mind up about the camera as it might or might not apply to me, since I have not even HELD ONE, but I have to say, I think Hogan's piece is riddled with facile statements. I would have to disagree with a number of his statements in many of his recent "Here's what Nikon screwed up on!' rants, which is what many of his columns have devolved into over the past year. He keeps criticizing almost everything the company does, based on his fantasy of how "he" would run the company and design the products. He basically rips on the camera without having held one. Or shot one. Now I must head off and read ,"What Thom Hogan got wrong, by the guys who actually make their living selling cameras". But as a former top camera salesman, I can tell you one thing...this thing will have MASSIVE appeal to many potential buyers.

Hindsight's always 20-20, as you show, so we'll see how you do with this one.

Hogan reads the annual reports and can probably sort the financial statements, too. He's making nothing up and doesn't offer unqualified, fact-free observations. It remains very much his take but he's in touch with whatever data Nikon provides. That's his trade. He doesn't mix-up BS and informed opinion. There's a difference.

Nikon's 2013 Annual Report | byThom | Thom Hogan

Friends behind counters here today talk of the sort of customer "leakage" Hogan recently discussed. It's affecting both Nikon and Canon. It's also no "fantasy." Think the market is slightly more complicated in late 2013--something you'd see quickly if you were selling. Mike Johnston spoke to this recently by asking if FF cameras are really necessary in the Online Photographer. Non-DSLR systems are catching up and suit the needs of many.

 

[amolitor]

Just because Thom is right about some things doesn't mean that he's right about other things.

 

[robbins.photo]

Hindsight's always 20-20, as you show, so we'll see how you do with this one.

Hogan reads the annual reports and can probably sort the financial statements, too. He's making nothing up and doesn't offer unqualified, fact-free observations. It remains very much his take but he's in touch with whatever data Nikon provides. That's his trade. He doesn't mix-up BS and informed opinion. There's a difference.

Nikon's 2013 Annual Report | byThom | Thom Hogan

Friends behind counters here today talk of the sort of customer "leakage" Hogan recently discussed. It's affecting both Nikon and Canon. It's also no "fantasy." Think the market is slightly more complicated in late 2013--something you'd see quickly if you were selling. Mike Johnston spoke to this recently by asking if FF cameras are really necessary in the Online Photographer. Non-DSLR systems are catching up and suit the needs of many.

Thom might be a pretty knowledgeable guy, but I seriously doubt Nikon has given him access to their internal marketing data. I work for a small business, a very small business when you compare us to the company the size of Nikon. We regularly review our internal information to determine what products and services are selling well, how to best market and how to tailor new products to our consumers. We also look for ways to offer products that will attract new consumers. Like most businesses of any size we have a department full of professionals being well paid to analyze this data and give us their best estimates on which products and services they feel will be the most profitable for the company, both short and long term.

Thom's analysis doesn't consider any of this data, because he wouldn't have access to it. Nothing against Thom, I'm sure he's a wonderful guy and all, but he can't possibly do a proper analysis because frankly he simply doesn't have the facts he would need to really do that. The only people who do would be in Nikon's marketing department. That's not to say that such things are infalible or that all marketing departments are always right, but Thom's analysis fails in the same way that so many others do, in that he makes the assumption that he represents the core market for which this camera is built. He doesn't. I don't either.

What he really needs to do is go back and rethink his "review" on this basis - understanding that this is not a camera that is meant to replace anything in the current Nikon line up. The fact that it is being released during the Christmas season is not a coincidence, and that alone should tell you droves about the sort of people Nikon is attempting to reach with this camera. It should answer any questions you might have about why the put an autofocusing system in it with fewer focus points - or eliminated certain options, etc. This wasn't something Nikon threw together on a whim after all, they put some thought into this one. So instead of getting a full head of steam on and trying to say that this choice was wrong or that choice was wrong stop and try to think about why Nikon made that choice in the first place. Once you do their choices start making a lot of sense.

But you won't get anywhere going into this with the same perspective Thom has, or a lot of other people have on the subject. They look at it from the "I want feature X, therefore Nikon should have included it" standpoint. What they need to do is stop and think, ok, if I were a first time buyer or someone who hadn't used a camera for a while or often would feature X really be something I would care about, and if so would it be worth an additional amount of $X for me."

Sure they could have loaded this thing down with one of everything on everyone's wish list - of course if they had they wouldn't have sold a single unit because the camera would be priced so ridiculously high only Warren Buffett could afford one, not to mention the camera itself gets more and more difficult and complex with each additional feature.

 

[Buck777]

My only hesitation to the Df is price. It's going to be roughly the price of a D800, with the workings of a D610 and a D4 processor. Is the processor worth that much? Arguable. I just love the feel of the old film cameras. With the amount of bodies churning out its getting to a stage that its like mobile phones.....don't fall in love with what you've got because the next one out kills it dead. Somehow the concept of a Df seems timeless, and I guess that's the market Nikon have aimed for. I definitely have a foot in that camp.

 

[PhotoWrangler]

Quite frankly, I dont think the D800 should be in the "DSLR" category to begin with. It's overkill, and useless to 90% of the people who own one.

 

[rexbobcat]

I just don't know any hipster who has $3000 to throw at a retro-yet-not-at-all camera.

Maybe it's being marketed toward Gen X?

I don't know if many working pros will like it, but I know several older photogs (no offense) who are already falling in lust with this camera.

 

[robbins.photo]

I just don't know any hipster who has $3000 to throw at a retro-yet-not-at-all camera.

Maybe it's being marketed toward Gen X?

I don't know if many working pros will like it, but I know several older photogs (no offense) who are already falling in lust with this camera.

I have no doubt Nikon will hit their targeted sales numbers with it. This isn't really a camera built for camera geeks or working pro's, that's not who they are after here. No need for them to market this to that crowd because they know that crowd will buy the replacement for the D800 or the D7100 as soon as it comes out. Nope, this thing is for Christmas shoppers - they covered the entry level market with the release of the D5300, this is their high end offering for X-mas. What they have here is a camera that required almost no R&D, uses tried and true technology, has been simplified enough that your non camera geek will be able to use it, but still has that cool "retro" factor that will boost sales. Their are more than a few people out there who think that the more something costs, the better it must be - and that is a big part of the market Nikon is going after with this one. Probably one of the reasons they used the less complicated AF system - easier for the non camera geeks to use.

 

[cgw]

Thom might be a pretty knowledgeable guy, but I seriously doubt Nikon has given him access to their internal marketing data. I work for a small business, a very small business when you compare us to the company the size of Nikon. We regularly review our internal information to determine what products and services are selling well, how to best market and how to tailor new products to our consumers. We also look for ways to offer products that will attract new consumers. Like most businesses of any size we have a department full of professionals being well paid to analyze this data and give us their best estimates on which products and services they feel will be the most profitable for the company, both short and long term.

Thom's analysis doesn't consider any of this data, because he wouldn't have access to it. Nothing against Thom, I'm sure he's a wonderful guy and all, but he can't possibly do a proper analysis because frankly he simply doesn't have the facts he would need to really do that. The only people who do would be in Nikon's marketing department. That's not to say that such things are infalible or that all marketing departments are always right, but Thom's analysis fails in the same way that so many others do, in that he makes the assumption that he represents the core market for which this camera is built. He doesn't. I don't either.

Hogan's data aren't any different from what you or I can access: quarterly financials, annual reports, stock prices and analysis. It's a public company. Don't believe I've read anything by him based on the "trusted sources" crap cited on the rumor sites. You don't have to agree with him but what's the point of discrediting him unless you're privy to more than he knows?

 

[cgw]

Just because Thom is right about some things doesn't mean that he's right about other things.

Nothing like a firm grasp of the obvious.

 

[amolitor]

Just because Thom is right about some things doesn't mean that he's right about other things.

Nothing like a firm grasp of the obvious.

You keep citing his rightness on one thing as evidence that he's right about other things, so I thought I'd help you out a little.

 

[TheLost]

I just don't know any hipster who has $3000 to throw at a retro-yet-not-at-all camera.

Maybe it's being marketed toward Gen X?

I don't know if many working pros will like it, but I know several older photogs (no offense) who are already falling in lust with this camera.

Target market*...


I know at least two wedding photographers that have ordered one... It's less 'in your face' and fits in with their style of shooting (young mid-20's D.I.N.K. couples getting married and want a hip-cool-funky photographer).


(*full disclosure... I want the Df and in the past 8 years have owned two rovers... It's like they've tapped into my mind!!!)

 

[robbins.photo]

Hogan's data aren't any different from what you or I can access: quarterly financials, annual reports, stock prices and analysis. It's a public company. Don't believe I've read anything by him based on the "trusted sources" crap cited on the rumor sites. You don't have to agree with him but what's the point of discrediting him unless you're privy to more than he knows?

I wasn't attempting to discredit anyone. He doesn't have access to Nikon's internal marketing data. I don't either. Neither do you. This isn't the sort of information that any company would release. That is really the only point I was attempting to make, it is a very valid point and quite frankly your emotional over reaction is completely unwarranted. None of the information you cited would give anyone any insight whatsoever into how well a new camera design may or may not perform.

So no, I don't agree with him. Neither am I making an effort to discredit him. Merely pointing out that he does not have access to the data necessary to make a critical analysis of the possible sales performance of the Df. Nikon does, and I doubt they would have released it without considering that data. Question is, are there marketing peoople right? In this case I'm guessing they probably are, and that while the sales for the Df probably won't be a huge number in terms of number of units the profit per unit sold will most likely be a very good thing for Nikon's bottom line. I can also see that if the Df proves popular enough it might grow into it's own line.

I also pointed out that Thom's analysis fails due to the same mistaken assumption that so many others suffer from, that the Df is meant as a replacement for various other models already available. It isn't. If you look at the way in which Nikon is marketing it and how the release date coincides with the christmas shopping season it becomes fairly obvious that the Df isn't meant to compete with the D800, D6x0, etc - it's not designed as a replacement for these systems. It's not, by and large, aimed at that market. Sure, you might have some folks who already own systems like that also purchase a Df for a variety of reasons, but Nikon's aim here is not to migrate people from these camera's to the Df.

Not sure why this is such an emotional subject for you, for me it isn't. I simply am looking at the facts I have available and giving the best analysis I can from those facts. If that upsets you then I suggest then perhaps you might want to stop and think about why.

 

[TheFantasticG]

Funny, I got really excited about it. I'm more than able to purchase the camera (even though I'll be risking the wrath of my ol' lady). I got excited about the button/knob layout because after years with the D90 and D7000 I'm want my button controls to quickly change settings. At the same time the 11 and 39 pt AFs have been lackluster enough with the lenses I own that I don't trust them to track kids well enough to my standards. I say that from trying to AF my friends under 3 yo kids. And yes, I know how to use the AF and I tried many combos (AF settings and lenses), but the kids always seem to best the AF at the most important moments. So, I was hoping the new cam to have the 51 pt AF. Since it doesn't, I'm either going to end up with the D7100, D800, or waiting to see what the V3 is going to be. DOF isn't a concern as the two main types of photography I participate in I need more not less DOF. ISO performance is neglible between them (D7100 & D800), IMO. I don't know. I still have time to think about it as the wife isn't even preggo yet... and I just bought a new motorcycle to occupy my time

I wouldn't mind renting one... Let's see when they are available.

Same here. If they actually improve the 39 pt AF to act like the 51 pt AF then I'll get one. Otherwise, no.